- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge Blocks Trump Santuary city order
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:22 pm to CptBengal
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:22 pm to CptBengal
I'm not sure about the order here, but you are completely incorrect.
All lower courts are created by statute. Thus the legislature has the authority to disband them.
All lower courts are created by statute. Thus the legislature has the authority to disband them.
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 4:00 pm
0
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:22 pm to Iosh
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:22 pm to tigerinDC09
Minor delay, as with the immigration ban, SCOTUS will rule in favor of the constitution and back the President.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:22 pm to tigerinDC09
id like to see them enforce this "ruling". These liberal judges are getting out of hand. This is so clearly a power of the executive. They don't get to usurp the powers of another branch just by ruling it so. Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:23 pm to CptBengal
quote:
No oversight?
That money is distributed under the decision of the executive branch.
Those cities have no right to it...period.
Just curious.
Where did you receive your Juris Doctorate degree?
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:23 pm to roadGator
quote:
If it were just that and not activism...
Doesn't matter. That's the system and it goes both ways.
•The executive branch can declare Executive Orders, which are like proclamations that carry the force of law, but the judicial branch can declare those acts unconstitutional.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:23 pm to Haughton99
quote:Not a word.
wan't Trump
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:24 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:My thumbnail understanding of the argument is that Trump was threatening with aid to localities that was established under the ARRA stimulus. The executive imposing new and arbitrary (since the funds weren't related to immigration) conditions thus steps on Congress' purse powers.
How on earth is this unconstitutional?
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:24 pm to LSUcjb318
quote:
Doesn't matter.
I respect a liberal that actually takes this stance and doesn't pretend that it's not activism.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:25 pm to Haughton99
Forget it...
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:25 pm to CptBengal
quote:BREAKING: Trumpkin, subsisting on diet of paste and paint chips, confuses legislative and executive branches.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:27 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:26 pm to tigerinDC09
He should order ice to surround every police department and every court of law in sanctuary cities. Anyone entering or leaving should be required to show proof of legal status. If they can't prove they're legal, arrest them. Anyone harboring illegals should be arrested for conspiracy to commit immigration fraud, harboring an illegal/fugitive, and/or obstruction. Once these libtard pussies are in federal prison getting dick up the arse... they'll comply.
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:26 pm to Iosh
quote:
The executive imposing new and arbitrary (since the funds weren't related to immigration) conditions thus steps on Congress' purse powers.
And what happens if Congress, well the GOP Congress that is, submits a brief or even passes a resolution saying that they have no problem with Trump using those funds as leverage against sanctuary cities?
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:27 pm to Iosh
Am I correct in stating that the stimulus is not a contract with the state and legislature was not a party to the case? I admit I don't know much about this particular case, so your point got me curious.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:28 pm to Iosh
quote:
BREAKING: Trumpkin, subsisting on diet of paste and paint chips, confuses legislative and executive branches.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:29 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Judge Blocks anything Trump decides to do
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:30 pm to BBONDS25
The legislature doesn't need to be party to a case in order for the judiciary to conclude it violates separation of powers. They can't abrogate to the executive powers explicitly designated to them by the Constitution simply by inaction. Heck sometimes even if they want to (see: line-item veto).
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:30 pm to Sentrius
quote:
And what happens if Congress
Now you're getting it.
Trump? Not so much.
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:30 pm to tigerinDC09
Trump should just ignore it.
Everyone thinks federal court decisions have any merit.
Contrary to that belief the court doesn't have any enforcement power.
"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" Andrew Jackson
Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist papers said the Judiciary is the weakest branch of Government, "because they have neither sword nor purse"
The president and or congress can absolutely ignore the judiciary in the US because they really don't matter.
As long as the President does not wish to have his justice dept enforce an edict or decision of the SCOTUS nothing will happen.
SCOTUS decisions have typically followed politics not defined them.
As an example...
Brown vs Board of education. 1954
It wasn't even enforced until the 1965 Civil Rights act passed by Congress and then enforced by Johnson.
Without Presidential enforcement public schools would still be segregated.
Everyone thinks federal court decisions have any merit.
Contrary to that belief the court doesn't have any enforcement power.
"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" Andrew Jackson
Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist papers said the Judiciary is the weakest branch of Government, "because they have neither sword nor purse"
The president and or congress can absolutely ignore the judiciary in the US because they really don't matter.
As long as the President does not wish to have his justice dept enforce an edict or decision of the SCOTUS nothing will happen.
SCOTUS decisions have typically followed politics not defined them.
As an example...
Brown vs Board of education. 1954
It wasn't even enforced until the 1965 Civil Rights act passed by Congress and then enforced by Johnson.
Without Presidential enforcement public schools would still be segregated.
This post was edited on 4/25/17 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 4/25/17 at 3:31 pm to LoneMDG
How many threads is that for this same gif? Really showing off your wit. Though, I guess for a gump, it's the best you can do.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News